Zephemus's page

Really, I have a bit of a problem with this. For me the added bonuses to extra EXP or extra Skill Points, not to mention the added ability bonus for oh say halflings, don't seem like a bribe, but more of a push.

It's one of the major problems that I have with 4th edition is that it kind of blackmails the players into playing a stereotypical race/class set what with the added ability and skill bonuses, and if for any reason whatsoever you wish to play something that isn't a halfling rogue or eladrin wizard, then you're not playing the game right. Quite frankly it's just shy of madatory pregenerated characters.

Now in 3.5 Elves had wizards listed as thier favorite class though thier bonus ability was DEX, not INT. And if you wanted to play an class that the races isn't so inclind to play a lot, like the Cleric, then in 3.5 you weren't horribly punished for doing it.

Finally, something needs to be done in Pathfinder to keep the races from always having to be played sterotypically, and penalizing the players that break from there.

The biggest "problem" of games like this is that people think it is - or at least has to be - fair and balanced. Especially those constant whinings about mage superiority and the cry for more goodness for melee classes is a huge pain. The simple truth there is that you cant make these classes equally powerful without making them "the same". This is the 4e approach, but IMO it also makes classes much more boring simply because they are "the same in green".

There is a way to solve this dilemma without needing to fiddle with the rules too much, but it is not easy to write down guidelines for it. Simply put the DM has to make sure every player has had his share of fun in the evening. When you have a triggerhappy wizard just give him a few trash mobs to nuke and make him happy and then add a tough one with spell resistance / immunities for the fighter. Everyone should be happy then, and wont need to whine for a better set of rules.

Wizards simply are the most flexible class in the game, fighters are focusing everything on their one job. This is the structural difference which explains why they cant ever be balanced evenly by the rules and why the DM has to do this.

I've never had any problem with the power settings for most of the classes. My main two that I've had huge problems with is Paladin, underpowered, being not worth taking past lvl 5, and the Monk, overpowered, being able to waste an entire dungeon with two of them.

I really respect that everyone has its strengths and weaknesses and usually stick to them, though most of my problems with 3.5 was that the spells per day system might have made the majority of mage type characters "saving" thier spells and relying on the crossbows instead, which to me doesn't scream wizard. The main way I thought about rectifying this is reintroducing mana meters, or the power points system that was put in for Psyonics late into 3.5.

Another thing I would like to ask off topic is if anyone else feels the same way I do about spells per day, if the idea is impeding on most wizards from being the spell slingers that we come to expect.

Wow, got a lot more intelectual feedback then I expected here.

Thanks everyone who posted.

Hey everyone, I just wanted to start a thread of general pros and cons by you all about the editions of D&D 3rd-4th editions. Maybe we can accumulate these ideas into what a great RPG should be in Pathfinder.

I'll start:

3.5 pro; The immersion one got from playing the game was great and one of the main ways that this was done was detailing and creating all of the wonderful options released in 3rd and 3.5. In 4th edition it very much feels as if you're playing a board game and thus the fantasy world feeling has been lost.

3.5 con; One of the main strengths that led to the immersion feeling in 3.5 was that the skill list was incredibly inntricate. Though while this was a great things realistically. Practically, however, picking and choosing you character's skill list took forever.

4th ed pro; the skill list in 4th edition D&D was toned down to not make players rip thier hair out when creating a character and the skill list streamlining alone, IMHO, didn't ruin the entire feeling of immersion to the game.

4th ed con; One of the first things that I had to gripe about when I first opened the 4th edition PHB, I found that the new alignments, especially the neuteral ones, had become so vague that as a DM it becomes hard to expect how the players should act. A lot of fellow players at my LGS were either against alignments altogether, or had a problem with how alignments were associated with spells and/or classes, such as the paladin which I could agree on. Now to those people that think that the alignment system should be done away with entirely, this comes down to an issue of "if you don't like it, then just ignore it" really, and this goes for the alignment affiliations spells had was that alignments should have one purpose, to give the DM an idea of how characters are supposed to act and think, and to give some loose rules/guidlines on classes.

~September 28th, 2008~
Hi everyone, I've finally got the website down to where I can post and give my two cents on the game.
I would like to start out my first post by giving an introduction and a pre-play opinion of what I have encountered in RPGs that this game could use.

First off, call me Zephemus, of Zeph for short. I'm a 22 year old college student that has played the the 3.5 D&D game since it's release in 2000. I have loved the game of D&D 3.5 primarily for it's detailed mechanics and how the detail in mechanics reflects the reality of the game. One of my favorite classes to play over the years has been the Paladin, and despite it's lack of power in 3rd and 3.5 I've played them at almost every game.

Though not everything about 3.5 was fun to play. For one, the great detail that the game had was great for immersion, though when trying to teach new players about the game, it was hard to explain the rules, and most times where to start. Another main concern for me was the fact that while the Monk class had very little restriction to reflect the tremendous amounts of power that it obtained, the Paladin had even more restrictions on character build and not even close to the options or power that the monk, or any other class had for that opinion. The third problem was one that I didn't share alone. In 3.5 the spell casting was done in a way that if your DM made the party go through a long excursion without rest, then you wouldn't have much of a chance to regenerate you spell options for the day. One of the easiest ways one could rectify this is by reintroducing mana meters, which they did for the psyonic classes later on, but failed to include for the other divine, natural, or arcane spellcasting fans out there.

With the recent release of 4th edition I was exited to try a new system out. 4th edition promised that cloth wearing casters (mainly wizards) would not have to rely on thier crossbows more than thier spells in games, and quite frankly they delivered. To further list things about D&D 4th edition that I've found pleasing to play with, my favorite class has finally gotten the respect they deserve in game mechanics, the skill list was shortened and streamlined which I found made somethings a lot less tedious, and the aim of streamlining the gameplay made it much easier to teach new players the game as well as not having to spend nearly a half of a day just making a new character, if you weren't a vet at the game of course.

I may edit this post as it is 0530hours where I am at and I am writing this post tired as hell.

Thanks for reading,
~Zephemus

Thanks you for the opportunity to help out in the beta testing. I've been playing D&D for 8 years now, since I was 14 of course making me 22.
Honestly there was a lot about 3.5 that I liked and hated and hoped that 4th edition would rectify these mistakes. While alot of what has happened in 4th edition has not only done this but included new things that I did not expect and was pleasently suprised by, I feel that 4th edition as a whole was really phoned in and had a lot of expectations that it couldn't live up to.

Personally what is being done here is really what I feel should have been done in the development of a new edition in the first place. And I will find a place, other than this site, to post my ideas for what should and should not be done to enhance this game.

Thanks all for reading

~Zeph.